Tracy's blog

The concept of a digital visitor and resident was new to me prior to coming across past week’s assigned readings.

I really enjoy the alternative that this presents to the terms “digital native” and “digital immigrants”. I have never been comfortable with either term. I usually have associated these terms with ageism, bias, and making sweeping generalizations about a person’s participation, fluency and skill with technology, just based on age. I have always found this to be a very superficial and inaccurate portrayal of capacity to learn and grow.

My map is largely modelled after the one that Dave White creates in his video. On the top left quadrant I have listed a number of social media platforms in which I consider myself a visitor, mainly for personal use. The bottom right is where I list platforms that I almost exclusively use for work, and they are communities where I create, share, and network with others. I have a large, rectangular space that occupies both personal and institutional “residency” where I have placed LinkedIn. In the last few years, LinkedIn for me has been a space where I have been creating and sharing content, but not all of it has to do with my ‘day job’. I have been sharing reflections about leadership, parenting, trauma at work, and the effects of the pandemic on relationships. It’s been the closest thing to a regular blog that I have capacity to contribute to, and I’ve enjoyed seeing the responses my posts have garnered from people I am not even first degree connections with.

Where do you visit, and where are you a resident?

The presentations from the Virtual Symposium sessions introduced me to a wide array of ideas, concepts, and applications in areas such as learning design, curriculum development, use of artificial intelligence, adaptation to change and disruption, scholarly research and writing, and online collaboration. The ideas I will reflect on for this response are from a session recorded in March 2023, whose panelists discussed the topic of “AI and Learning Design”.

In this recording, the speakers addressed current and emerging issues and opportunities presented by the use of Artificial Intelligence content generators – such as ChatGPT – in the K-12, post-secondary, corporate, and vocational training learning environments. For me, the most interesting exchange in this recording was the panelists’ views on the practice of banning AI content generators and disallowing students to use them for school work.  All of the panelists shared the view that banning AI content generators from schools is not a practical or sustainable solution despite valid concerns that persist regarding plagiarism and copyright infringement (Royal Roads University, 2023). As a contract instructor at a post-secondary school in B.C., this discussion piqued my interest as I know faculty members are grappling with finding a practical way forward that balances the reality that these tools are here to stay with the need to maintain integrity in student evaluation and assessment.

Some school districts in the United States have already made the move to ban the use of AI content generators, citing concerns with cheating (Roose, 2023). However, as Clint Lalonde put it, banning AI generator tools from classrooms is “like going to carpentry school and banning the use of a saw, but when you get into the workplace you’re going to be using saws so you need to know how to use these” (Royal Roads University, 2023). Similarly, The New York Times Columnist Kevin Roose (2023) echoed this idea about the use of AI in classrooms, adding:

That’s the biggest reason not to ban it from the classroom, in fact — because today’s students will graduate into a world full of generative A.I. programs. They’ll need to know their way around these tools — their strengths and weaknesses, their hallmarks and blind spots — in order to work alongside them. To be good citizens, they’ll need hands-on experience to understand how this type of A.I. works, what types of bias it contains, and how it can be misused and weaponized.

Indeed, educators have valid concerns about inappropriate uses of AI generators in school, because of the paradigm shift that the technology brings in conventional student assessment practices. Regarding these concerns, researcher David Mhlanga (2023) notes:  

It is feasible that this will result in regulations that ban its utilization; nevertheless, it is also conceivable that ChatGPT technology will become ubiquitous before institutions have the time to alter their policies. An approach that focuses on correcting the issues that have been caused by ChatGPT while also taking into account the potential benefits and drawbacks of the platform would be more effective. (p. 10)

What this panel discussion cemented for me is the reality that students will need to build fluency and digital literacy beyond the classroom; there is a strong argument for educators to not only recognize, but make attempts to adopt the use of AI in classrooms in ways that create meaningful and relevant student experiences that foster learning in a supportive and transparent way.

References

Mhlanga, D. (2023). Open AI in education, the responsible and ethical use of ChatGPT towards lifelong learning. SSRN Electronic Journal  https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.4354422

Roose, K. (2023, January 12) Don’t Ban ChatGPT in Schools. Teach With It. The New York Times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/12/technology/chatgpt-schools-teachers.html

Royal Roads University. (2023, March 7). AI and Learning Design in Education [Video].

YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFrAs59sDHI

---